182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14578431)
1. Normal intersubject threshold variability and normal limits of the SITA SWAP and full threshold SWAP perimetric programs.
Bengtsson B; Heijl A
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2003 Nov; 44(11):5029-34. PubMed ID: 14578431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A new rapid threshold algorithm for short-wavelength automated perimetry.
Bengtsson B
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2003 Mar; 44(3):1388-94. PubMed ID: 12601072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Inter-subject variability and normal limits of the SITA Standard, SITA Fast, and the Humphrey Full Threshold computerized perimetry strategies, SITA STATPAC.
Bengtsson B; Heijl A
Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 1999 Apr; 77(2):125-9. PubMed ID: 10321523
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Diagnostic sensitivity of fast blue-yellow and standard automated perimetry in early glaucoma: a comparison between different test programs.
Bengtsson B; Heijl A
Ophthalmology; 2006 Jul; 113(7):1092-7. PubMed ID: 16815399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparing the full-threshold and Swedish interactive thresholding algorithms for short-wavelength automated perimetry.
Ng M; Racette L; Pascual JP; Liebmann JM; Girkin CA; Lovell SL; Zangwill LM; Weinreb RN; Sample PA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2009 Apr; 50(4):1726-33. PubMed ID: 19074800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from Full Threshold, SITA Standard, and SITA Fast strategies.
Artes PH; Iwase A; Ohno Y; Kitazawa Y; Chauhan BC
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2002 Aug; 43(8):2654-9. PubMed ID: 12147599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Between-algorithm, between-individual differences in normal perimetric sensitivity: full threshold, FASTPAC, and SITA. Swedish Interactive Threshold algorithm.
Wild JM; Pacey IE; Hancock SA; Cunliffe IA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1999 May; 40(6):1152-61. PubMed ID: 10235548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of standard automated perimetry, frequency-doubling technology perimetry, and short-wavelength automated perimetry for detection of glaucoma.
Liu S; Lam S; Weinreb RN; Ye C; Cheung CY; Lai G; Lam DS; Leung CK
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2011 Sep; 52(10):7325-31. PubMed ID: 21810975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Sensitivity and specificity of the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm for glaucomatous visual field defects.
Budenz DL; Rhee P; Feuer WJ; McSoley J; Johnson CA; Anderson DR
Ophthalmology; 2002 Jun; 109(6):1052-8. PubMed ID: 12045043
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. SITA standard in optic neuropathies and hemianopias: a comparison with full threshold testing.
Wall M; Punke SG; Stickney TL; Brito CF; Withrow KR; Kardon RH
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2001 Feb; 42(2):528-37. PubMed ID: 11157893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma.
Artes PH; Hutchison DM; Nicolela MT; LeBlanc RP; Chauhan BC
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Jul; 46(7):2451-7. PubMed ID: 15980235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of two Humphrey perimetry programs: full threshold and SITA standard testing strategy for learning effect.
Yenice O; Temel A
Eur J Ophthalmol; 2005; 15(2):209-12. PubMed ID: 15812761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Automated perimetry: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.
Delgado MF; Nguyen NT; Cox TA; Singh K; Lee DA; Dueker DK; Fechtner RD; Juzych MS; Lin SC; Netland PA; Pastor SA; Schuman JS; Samples JR;
Ophthalmology; 2002 Dec; 109(12):2362-74. PubMed ID: 12466186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Clinical evaluation of SITA: a new family of perimetric testing strategies.
Shirato S; Inoue R; Fukushima K; Suzuki Y
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 1999 Jan; 237(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 9951638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Quantification and Predictors of Visual Field Variability in Healthy, Glaucoma Suspect, and Glaucomatous Eyes Using SITA-Faster.
Tan JCK; Agar A; Kalloniatis M; Phu J
Ophthalmology; 2024 Jun; 131(6):658-666. PubMed ID: 38110124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of threshold estimation and learning effect of two perimetric strategies, SITA Fast and CLIP, in damaged visual fields.
Capris P; Autuori S; Capris E; Papadia M
Eur J Ophthalmol; 2008; 18(2):182-90. PubMed ID: 18320509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Full-threshold versus Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) in normal individuals undergoing automated perimetry for the first time.
Schimiti RB; Avelino RR; Kara-José N; Costa VP
Ophthalmology; 2002 Nov; 109(11):2084-92; discussion 2092. PubMed ID: 12414419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of the Humphrey swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) and full threshold strategies.
Sharma AK; Goldberg I; Graham SL; Mohsin M
J Glaucoma; 2000 Feb; 9(1):20-7. PubMed ID: 10708227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?
Conway ML; Hosking SL; Zhu H; Cubbidge RP
BMC Ophthalmol; 2014 Dec; 14():166. PubMed ID: 25539569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Statistical aspects of the normal visual field in short-wavelength automated perimetry.
Wild JM; Cubbidge RP; Pacey IE; Robinson R
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1998 Jan; 39(1):54-63. PubMed ID: 9430545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
